Pathfinder 2E Pathfinder 2e

[Eric V]

Yes, the average Joe or Mary on the street is going to look at 5E and think two things: gee wilickers, that's a lot of math, and wow, that art is pretty edgy.

I'll stand by that: it's what most if the already pretty nerdy people in my ambit think, and it is the aesthetic WotC is clearly courting.

This, plus the 4 yr-olds example above, just sounds ridonk to me, no offense intended. Completely unquantifiable statements; most people are going to think 5e art is pretty edgy? I don't even know where to begin with that one...

 

[Parmandur]

This, plus the 4 yr-olds example above, just sounds ridonk to me, no offense intended. Completely unquantifiable statements; most people are going to think 5e art is pretty edgy? I don't even know where to begin with that one...

Aesthetically edgy, yes, and intimidatingly complex in terms of rules. I see no reason to doubt this, based on all of my experience. It's D&D, not Candyland.

 

[Matrix Sorcica]

That has not been my experience with the company at all - not since they took over the publication of Dragon and Dungeon magazines, and not now. The possibility that they aren't following the advice of the feedback you agree with doesn't mean they aren't listening to feedback. They're just making decisions you don't agree with.

During the "playtest" of Mythic Adventures, people pointed out serious issues with broken math etc., only to get handwaved away as "armchair designers". Then Mythic Adventures is released with none of the issues addressed. Resulting in horribly broken combos and a messed up Adventure Path, leading Paizo to never again releasing a Mythic adventure. YMMV, obiviously.

 

[Xenonnonex]

During the "playtest" of Mythic Adventures, people pointed out serious issues with broken math etc., only to get handwaved away as "armchair designers". Then Mythic Adventures is released with none of the issues addressed. Resulting in horribly broken combos and a messed up Adventure Path, leading Paizo to never again releasing a Mythic adventure. YMMV, obiviously.

Pretty much this.
During the playtest of Occult Adventures Buhlman forced one of their designers to conform only to his vision. Rather than getting a unique kineticist that had visionary ideas and design we got the broken nearly unplayable mess we see today. The kineticist can be playable but needs extensive modding to make it functional.
There are instances during the alpha and beta playtest where the designers did not acknowledge issues and feedback from the public.
Paizo do not take criticism even constructive criticism to their design work well.
Another example -> Paizo was given constructive feedback of their character sheet. Mona's response was quite unprofessional and accused the poster of that feedback of "enjoying rubbing shite in his face. And coming across as trollish"
https://www.reddit.com/r/Pathfinder_RPG/comments/co7217/worst_thing_about_pf2_is_the_choice_of_colors_for/

 

[Green Onceler]

Rather than getting a unique kineticist that had visionary ideas and design we got the broken nearly unplayable mess we see today.

Really? That seems rather harsh. I've played two kineticists, at levels 5 and 9, and thoroughly enjoyed both of them.

 

[CapnZapp]

Could I ask you to discuss PF1 features in a PF1 thread. (At least I think you're discussing PF1 since I don't recognize it from my PF2 CRB)

 

[billd91]

Pretty much this.
During the playtest of Occult Adventures Buhlman forced one of their designers to conform only to his vision. Rather than getting a unique kineticist that had visionary ideas and design we got the broken nearly unplayable mess we see today. The kineticist can be playable but needs extensive modding to make it functional.
There are instances during the alpha and beta playtest where the designers did not acknowledge issues and feedback from the public.
Paizo do not take criticism even constructive criticism to their design work well.
Another example -> Paizo was given constructive feedback of their character sheet. Mona's response was quite unprofessional and accused the poster of that feedback of "enjoying rubbing shite in his face. And coming across as trollish"
https://www.reddit.com/r/Pathfinder_RPG/comments/co7217/worst_thing_about_pf2_is_the_choice_of_colors_for/

Yeah, funny that one. It came right after he said they were taking the criticism to heart. Clearly a case of not listening to the public. And the trollish poster, and honestly it did trollishly take a personal swipe at whomever did the first one, did apologize.
Publishers are people who occasionally have a bad day. What's your excuse?

 

[Xenonnonex]

Yeah, funny that one. It came right after he said they were taking the criticism to heart. Clearly a case of not listening to the public. And the trollish poster, and honestly it did trollishly take a personal swipe at whomever did the first one, did apologize.
Publishers are people who occasionally have a bad day. What's your excuse?

The rest of his comment was totally unnecessary then. Especially in a public forum where it is visible to everyone.

I am just calling a bad take. Relax I am not attacking Mona himself merely how he responded. By saying what he said he was acting childish and unprofessional.

I think calling someone giving some constructive criticism a troll is itself trollish. But that is neither here or there. Relax.

 

[Kaodi]

If only there were some way to objectively test RPGs. Like a blind trial, or something like that. But that is probably too radical an idea, ; ) .

 

[zztong]

If only there were some way to objectively test RPGs. Like a blind trial, or something like that. But that is probably too radical an idea, ; ) .

I don't think its radical. It would be desirable, if it were possible. De gustibus non est disputandum. That is, it will be hard to get away from it being a matter of taste/preference.

What you might be able to do is define a number of traits you find to be desirable and then associate that with some kind of standard to be met. Kaodi's Fantasy RPG Standard. Then you could measure compliance with that standard. Others who like the same kind of game might then find your rating to be useful.

Another example of a standard might be how well a system conforms to human norms. Do people run at reasonable speeds, jump reasonable distances, etc. If so, they get rated as "realistic." Otherwise, they might be rated as "heroic" or perhaps "superheroic."

Similarly, you could have a rating of "Historic."